nitromefandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Top or bottom
will go at the top of the incomplete section, and if this template or are pushing down the content of a page due to an infobox or something else, the templates or should be used instead.}} NTPYTO was adding Template:Incomplete to the bottom of pages. I preferred to add it to the top, and since I was the most active one adding Template:Incomplete, I thought my preference on where to add Template:Incomplete should be the preference on how everyone should add it. Since NTPYTO was adding them to the bottom, I told him they should be added to the top. When NTPYTO told me he and Santi agreed on the bottom to where Template:Incomplete should be placed, NTPYTO suggested I take it to the forum. So here the topic is now. Although it may be rather moronic and stupid where to place a template, I think that Template:Incomplete should be palced at the bottom of pages. What do you think? -- 22:04, June 24, 2012 (UTC) :I always liked placing them at the top, just after the section headline. I find it is more easily clarified, especially when you have sections with subheadings like the Levels section. If you place it at the bottom of a Levels section with up to Level 7, for instance, it becomes harder to tell whether the person is talking about the Level 7 section being incomplete or the Levels section. Well, that, and I also like it because you can easily jump to a section and you know right away whether that section is incomplete or not if it is on the top. I much prefer it to be right after the section headings. 23:48, June 24, 2012 (UTC) ::When there are a lot of sections, maybe could happen what RSK says, but I think, talking about style, that an user prefers reading first the section, and then notice that it's incomplete. Anyway I like the two forms of adding it. 10:11, June 25, 2012 (UTC) :::I'll say both. Let's start with the article stub template. We should have one copy at the top such that it would be easier for the Nitrome Wiki team to identify it as a stub. Another one at the bottom to encourage those who finished reading the stub to add-on to the article. :::For articles with incomplete section, we should have an article witb incomplete section header at the top and incomplete/empty template for each subsection. SQhi•'''(talk) 10:49, June 25, 2012 (UTC) :::Double stub templates seems kind of redundant, and due to the size of them, they will make the page look bad by (potentially) taking up more space than article content on the page. But often, when you come to a stub page, the page is so short that you can see the top and bottom of a page. -- 13:05, June 25, 2012 (UTC) ::::With the exception of Template:Stub and Template:Disambig, we should probably do our best to place "announcement" templates at the beginning of pages or sections, depending on what we are talking about here. And NOBODY, deciding where the templates go is kind of important, as it is good to develop a consistent style when adding Template:Incomplete to pages. 06:56, June 27, 2012 (UTC) :::I think we should add them to the bottom. I think it looks better for one. Also, there is another reason to add them to the bottom. For short articles, often the infobox is next to some of the sections. If the template is placed at the top, it causes the template to be placed underneath the infobox, and pushed the text down. If the template is placed at the bottom, no text is pushed down. I will try to find an example and link to it. Also, sorry I haven't been editing much. I've been unbelievably busy. 12:36, June 27, 2012 (UTC) :::::How about we have them at both the top and the bottom, but the one at the top is only visible to us, the editing team(since we're the one in charge of managing the articles). I do agree with Random Story keeper that it's kind of important, and it's more important for us, the editors to know any issues with the page the moment we land on it. SQhi•'(talk) 02:25, June 28, 2012 (UTC) :::::http://nitrome.wikia.com/wiki/Nitrome:Sandbox :::::Besides, as I show here, the management header template has no effect on the infobox placement. SQhi'•'(talk) 02:28, June 28, 2012 (UTC) :::::::It seems a bit redundant to have one at the top and bottom of a paragraph, as it looks bad. If we do this, this may stretch pages horrendously, to the point that Template:Incomplete takes up more space than the added content in the section. -- 12:50, June 28, 2012 (UTC) :::: About my earlier point. If the template is added at the top of the section on a short article, then the infobox gets in the way, and causes the template to move the text down, making the page look bad and hard to follow. I have an example here. :Actually, I've changed my preference on where to place Temp:Incomplete, for two reason: it pushes thing far down on pages with short section (but then, for most pages with short sections, regardless of whether you place it at the top or bottom it is still pushed down), and it looks nicer at the bottom of a section.-- 18:17, July 7, 2012 (UTC) ::So, we have 2 votes for keeping it at the bottom, and 1 for the top? Where do Santi and SQhi stand in this? 18:28, July 7, 2012 (UTC) :::I vote '''Bottom'. 18:34, July 7, 2012 (UTC) ::::I still prefer the top, to be honest. Actually, we still have the pushing to the bottom of the infobox issue with Template:Empty, anyways. Kinda suggests we might want to stop using div boxes if we don't want empty space between a section and the infobox... 21:39, July 7, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Top. Let's just have our management templates as the "top banner". The opening paragraph and the infobox should be pushed down, together. clr perhaps?SQhi•'(talk) 07:08, July 8, 2012 (UTC) :::::::It would be ideal to have our management templates, save Template:Stub, at the top, even just after a section. Even if we were to place them at the bottom, we still don't solve the problem with Template:Empty, as that also gets pushed to the bottom of infoboxes, creating large space. The templates, the way they are now, are quite large, and that may not be necessary for such a purpose. 07:18, July 8, 2012 (UTC) :::::::Actually, I've changed my mind again. I think infoboxes should go at the top of pages, as if someone were to read a section, they would immediately know it would be incomplete, instead of reading to the bottom, thinking it would be complete, then suddenly being found it is incomplete. -- 01:56, July 9, 2012 (UTC) :I think I'll have to modify Template:Stub and Template:Incomplete. 10:29, July 9, 2012 (UTC) ::Yes. If we want to get rid of the space that is between a heading and the bottom of the infobox, as with the case of Template:Empty and Template:Incomplete, we might have to sacrifice the banners. Maybe plain italicised block text will do? Like... :: ''This section is incomplete. You can help Nitrome Wiki by fixing it. ::Article text and soforth. 22:24, July 9, 2012 (UTC) :::There are other types of tables with automatic size that addapt to the space on the page. 10:55, July 10, 2012 (UTC) :::I'll start to fix the templates. 11:08, July 10, 2012 (UTC) ::I made that: ::About Template:Empty, we can adjust the width adding when the template is next to an infobox. 12:29, July 10, 2012 (UTC) :::Actually, now that you have eliminated my main concern, I am okay with adding templates to the to now. 14:55, July 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::We can talk about the alignment of the template too. Left, center or right? I tested the three and all work correctly, even with an infobox. Also, the template doesn't have to replace the other one in all cases, so we could make it optional ( , for example). 15:20, July 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Santi's design is so much neater. Hmm, let's only have banners at the top of pages for whole article issues, which supersede everything else. For subsections, let's use Santi's small boxes. It's so much more presentable. ::::::SQhi•'(talk) 15:25, July 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::::That's an admirable idea. I just don't want to downsize everything, because the smaller they are, the less attention they get, and therefore the less chance they have of being fixed. I also vote '''Top' for the same reason. ::::::: 15:48, July 10, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::Also, Santi, you'd better make an adjustable one for Template:Empty, as we're having some problems with that too. :::::::: 12:55, July 11, 2012 (UTC) (Reset indent)I once added a width parameter to Template:Empty, but it messed up the template. And since widths of screens and pages vary, it might be best to just make a template that can wrap around infoboxes instead of getting pushed down. I don't know any code for that, though. 07:45, July 18, 2012 (UTC) :I'm currently adding a new format to the banners, and I think that I can use switch to solve the problems about the size. I'll try to finish the template soon. 09:47, July 18, 2012 (UTC) ::It's fine, we just need to be consistent with the style and size of our banners. :: 11:34, July 18, 2012 (UTC) :::Maybe all we need is to be able to flush left the template when necessary. :::I love the mini-templates more though.SQhi•'''(talk)•'52k edit 17:26, July 18, 2012 (UTC) ::::I tested the new banners in my sandbox and then I updated the templates. Now, about incomplete and empty, I propose to do something like I did with spoiler and spoiler/mini: when the template pushes down test, who edits the page only has to write instead of . If you agree I'll do the same with empty, and if you need to see how it looks or something else, you can see Pig cannon, where I tested the new template. ::::Well, I think that we can start voting (support=top, oppose=bottom). You can use if you want. 10:43, July 19, 2012 (UTC) ::::'Update:' The template has been created. I tested it here and looks good. 10:52, July 19, 2012 (UTC) Support=top -- 20:28, July 19, 2012 (UTC) Oh, I forgot! As proposer (top). 20:54, July 19, 2012 (UTC) ::::: Great work, Santi, although would you be able to stretch the short incomplete template so that it is about as wide as Template:Empty/small. I find the template leaves a noticeable gap from the left margin of the page. This is only a minor concern, however, and I would approve of adding templates to the top even if you can't fix it. 21:19, July 19, 2012 (UTC) ::::::: Yeah. I agree with RSK, but amazing work so far. 21:28, July 19, 2012 (UTC) :::::::: Now that my concerns have been eliminated due to Santi's great coding, I support top. Also, I think we are unanimous. Request for closure? (Reset indent) RSK, do you mean to make it smaller or longer? I'll fix it. 12:54, July 20, 2012 (UTC) :Done. You can see Pig cannon to know how it looks now. 20:02, July 20, 2012 (UTC) ::'Closed''' - There aren't opposers and all the concerns of this forum have been solved, so there is nothing more to talk about. The decision is at the top of the page. 20:16, July 20, 2012 (UTC)